Reviews
Sinners (2025)
A Breathtaking Film in Every Possible Sense - a Cinematic and Musical Experience that Defies Expectations
Director and writer Ryan Coogler shared that some of his most vivid cinematic memories come from watching horror films in theaters as a young man - experiences that sparked his deep love for cinema. According to him, "Sinners" is a kind of love letter to that feeling, crafted with the hope that viewers in theaters will experience the same thrill. And honestly? Mission accomplished.
"Sinners" is one of those films best experienced with as little prior knowledge as possible - we strongly recommend not reading anything, not watching trailers, and avoiding all conversations about it beforehand if you can. The film's plot flows with organic ease, taking unexpected and refreshing turns that hit especially well if you go in spoiler-free. So we'll steer clear of plot details here, too.
The initial inspiration behind the film came from Coogler's connection to his late uncle, James, who had a deep interest in music and history, particularly in the Mississippi blues tradition. James's stories and musical tastes left a lasting impression on Coogler and sparked the creative process that ultimately became this film. As you might guess, "Sinners"is at its core a musical film. Not in the sense of a musical or a movie with original songs woven in like "Django Unchained" - rather, music is part of "Sinners"' DNA. It's interwoven into the story, the characters, and the entire atmosphere, offering a unique lens on the culture, folklore, traditions, and struggles of the Black community in 1930s Mississippi.
The man behind the original score is the multi-talented Ludwig Göransson ("Oppenheimer", "Tenet", "Black Panther"), who, beyond being a top-tier music producer, continually reinvents himself with every project he touches. "Sinners" is no exception. In his relatively short but rich career, Göransson has produced electronic scores, orchestral compositions, and even rap and R&B. Here, he pivots once again - blending the score with musical production in an inspired exploration of the Blues and Country genres, in line with the film's tone. Traditional sounds, ambient textures, and gritty audio design are all used to balance the experience.
It's undoubtedly one of the finest soundtracks we've heard in recent years - one that elevates the film to another level. Göransson continues to prove himself as one of the most gifted musicians of our era, and it's no wonder that none other than Christopher Nolan chose him as his go-to composer, following Hans Zimmer. In "Sinners", the soundtrack also features live performances and original songs, and a separate album has even been released featuring both songs from the film and those inspired by it.
Visually, Coogler made a bold artistic choice - one reminiscent of cinema's greatest auteurs, like Nolan and Denis Villeneuve - to shoot the film using wide-format film stock, opting for analog cinematography. Specifically, the most grand and pure formats available: IMAX 15-perf 70mm and Ultra Panavision 70mm. This wasn't just an aesthetic decision, but an effort to merge the raw texture of classic cinema with the sheer visual power of modern technology - a symbolic gesture aligning with the themes the film explores. Coogler even sought guidance from Nolan himself, along with Emma Thomas, to master the use of these formats - not for bragging rights, but to amplify the film's emotional weight.
Another standout aspect of the film is the screenplay. It's written with a natural rhythm and flow, featuring smart, unexpected humor and effortlessly blending a range of genres. Coogler, who served as both writer and director, brings the script to life with mastery, drawing the best out of each genre he touches. Above all, his use of the IMAX format is impressively deliberate and effective.
Michael B. Jordan plays two distinct characters in the film - and not in a gimmicky or disconnected way. These characters interact constantly - they're twins - which makes for a serious acting challenge. Jordan rises to the occasion, and the visual effects team behind the scenes pulls it off beautifully, with impressive execution on every technical level. Visually, the film is nothing short of stunning.
Alongside Jordan, musician Miles Caton gives a remarkably strong performance in the second lead role. I was genuinely surprised to learn this was his first-ever acting role. Jack O'Connell is also outstanding, and the radiant Hailee Steinfeld dazzles on screen and delivers a compelling performance. While she doesn't sing in the film itself, she is featured on the movie's official soundtrack. Overall, the cast is excellent, and the chemistry is on point.
Every few months, there comes along an event film that simply must be seen - and "Sinners" is unquestionably one of them. It's one of the best films we've seen in recent memory: energetic, gripping, occasionally funny, with a sharp script, top-tier directing, brilliant performances, and musical ingenuity that stuns scene after scene. It has all the makings of a strong contender for film of the year. We highly recommend watching it in theaters - in the best auditorium you can find. IMAX, if possible, is absolutely the way to go.
Written by Dvir971 & Orr971.
The Brutalist (2024)
A Modern American Epic Told in the Highest Quality Possible
While in my personal opinion it is still not a "perfect" film, one cannot help but admire "The Brutalist"- one of the most important, impressive, and well-made films made in recent years.
The term "masterful" gets thrown around a lot these days, and I am guilty of overusing it myself, but Adrian Brody's performance in this film is nothing less than masterful in every sense of the word. The film runs nearly four hours, and for the vast majority of that time, Brody's face is on screen. He carries the film on his back in an incredibly impressive and charismatic way, delivering one of the best performances of his career-and certainly one of the finest in recent years. A second Oscar may very well be on the horizon. Guy Pearce, who has had plenty of outstanding performances throughout his career, gives what is likely his best performance ever in this film. His acting is extremely impressive, taking the viewer on an emotional rollercoaster, and I won't say more beyond that. Felicity Jones also gives an incredible performance that perhaps is not being talked about enough in the context of the immersive praise the movie is getting in all circles.
Recently, reports surfaced that AI was used to "enhance" the Hungarian accents of Adrian Brody and Felicity Jones, as well as to design some of the buildings shown in certain scenes. I don't want to dwell on this too much, but I will say that, in my view, AI should be kept out of artistic endeavors as much as possible. It's one thing if it's used behind the scenes for research and data gathering-but if it's something the audience directly experiences in the final product? Big no-no. Honestly, I was disappointed.
In many places, this film has been described as an "American Epic" and a modern classic-and rightfully so. It feels like an incredibly ambitious work, crafted with the highest quality, telling a very important story and meticulously structured. While I have other personal favorites from the past year, if, as some analysts predict and as certain early awards indicate, this film wins the Oscar for Best Picture, it would feel like a well-deserved victory-one that celebrates high-quality cinema made at the highest level. In fact, I believe this film could have easily been a five-star masterpiece, a title it has already received from many critics worldwide. However, one thing stands between it and that coveted label-its runtime.
Look, I am all for long movies. As someone who saw Oppenheimer six times in theaters and The Irishman twice in the same week it was released, I can confidently say that when done right, an extended runtime isn't a problem-it can even be amazing. But in this case, nearly four hours (!!) might have been a bit too much. Brady Corbet, for whom this film is one of his first full-length screenplays, may have fallen into the trap of keeping the script exactly as he envisioned it, without making the much-needed cuts that could have made it more accessible-and even improved it for a larger audience. The two films I mentioned earlier were written by screenwriters who are nothing short of masters of their craft (Christopher Nolan and Steven Zaillian, respectively), and they were structured so well that their runtimes were hardly felt. Even they didn't reach the length of this film. While The Brutalist has an undeniably excellent script, its astronomical runtime was definitely noticeable. I believe that even a slight edit-bringing it closer to the three-hour mark-could have worked wonders, creating a film that feels more cohesive and flows better, making it more inviting for repeat viewings like the films mentioned above.
The film, which revolves around an architect, innovatively weaves architectural design into its narrative. Production designer Judy Becker was responsible for crafting original buildings that fit both the era and the personality of the protagonist, László Tóth, a brutalist architect. Becker's designs serve as fascinating artistic expressions of Tóth's evolving and deeply conflicted identity, with the film's central project embodying both the spirit of brutalism and the film's core themes.
For this reason, the architecture in the film is far more than just a visual backdrop-it's an integral storytelling tool. Corbet, both as a director and screenwriter, handled this aspect exceptionally well and is highly likely to win an Oscar for it. Through this technique, he reflects Tóth's personal journey of loss, survival during one of the darkest periods in Jewish history, and the process of rebuilding after the Holocaust and World War II. With meticulous production design and impressive storytelling, the film uses architecture as a symbolic language, exploring how physical spaces can hold history, pain, and hope. Becker's work not only enhances the film's visual authenticity but also positions architecture as a key element in the protagonist's story of resilience-and, for those more knowledgeable about the field, at the very emotional core of the film. At least, until AI got involved.
The Brutalist is one of the most important films of recent years. With career-defining performances from Brody and Pearce, stunning direction and cinematography, an outstanding score, and a focus on urgent themes-particularly the growing antisemitism faced by Jews in the diaspora-I highly recommend everyone watch this film. While its runtime may be (and likely will be) exhausting for many viewers, don't let that stop you from experiencing this important work. It's the kind of film that will stay with you for days after watching.
A Complete Unknown (2024)
An Amazing Character Study of Dylan's Enigmatic Persona Led by Brilliant Acting
I have some sort of a bias, which seems more and more unjustified in the past year, against biographical films about musicians, seeing them as overdone and repetitive. The year 2024 has brought quite a few such biopics and has proven that the genre is still alive and kicking, showing that innovative art can still emerge within it. A Complete Unknown, directed by James Mangold, is one of the most striking examples of this in recent years. It's a captivating and engrossing film, centered around a jaw-dropping performance and an excellent script.
The main reason to watch this film, and undoubtedly its most impressive and dominant aspect, is the phenomenal performance of Timothée Chalamet-one of the most prominent actors of recent years-who delivers the performance of his career. His acting is, in my view, brilliant, and it is entirely reasonable to consider Chalamet as a serious contender to become the youngest-ever winner of the Academy Award for Best Actor at the upcoming ceremony.
The supporting cast is doing a tremendous job as well. Edward Norton, who is one of my all-time favorite actors regardless, gives one of the best performances in his career and manages to be absolutely captivating and likable. Monica Barbaro gives an incredible performance as well, that makes her worthy of her Oscar nomination. Elle Fanning also shines in a somewhat underappreciated performance across different reviews and impressions I read.
For obvious reasons, the film features plenty of amazing music, performed with remarkable authenticity by the cast-something that undeniably enhances the viewing experience and further impresses with the level of effort from both the cast and the production.
But again- the driving force of the film is Chalamet's extraordinary performance that managed to impress me completely. Chalamet's preparation for his challenging role as Bob Dylan was incredibly deep and extensive, proving that he earned his status as one of the most dominant actors of his generation not just by having a likable face, but primarily due to immense talent and unwavering dedication to his craft. For five years, he immersed himself in Dylan's world and life, learning to play the guitar and harmonica to perform Dylan's music as authentically as possible. To "replicate" Dylan's unique voice, Chalamet worked with vocal coaches and meticulously trained to match Dylan's tone and distinct way of speaking, focusing on subtle nuances in his speech patterns that made his voice as iconic and recognizable as it is. It's worth noting that all of Dylan's music in the film is performed by Chalamet himself, and his dedication was evident in the fact that he performed around 40 Dylan songs live during filming, striving to capture the essence of Dylan's music and deliver as precise an interpretation as possible of one of the most unique musicians in modern music.
Chalamet's commitment allowed him to step into Dylan's shoes not only musically but also in terms of the energy that characterized Dylan's performances in the 1960s. Beyond voice and music, Chalamet studied archival footage, interviews, and documentaries to mimic Dylan's body language and mannerisms. He paid close attention to Dylan's walk, his nonchalant stage presence, and the way he interacted with the microphone and audience. Even Bob Dylan himself provided feedback and advice to Chalamet during the film's production and was very supportive.
Chalamet also deeply researched the cultural landscape of the 1960s, which inspired Dylan's lyrics. He visited Dylan's former residences in New York, spoke with people from his inner circle, and spent time in key locations from Dylan's early career to absorb the atmosphere and lifestyle that shaped his artistry. Chalamet's goal wasn't just to play Dylan as a historical figure but to understand his mindset, quirks, and the curiosity and worldview that drove him. It's no surprise that, despite the film being released in the U. S. only a few weeks ago, Chalamet has already received endless praise for his performance, won awards, and positioned himself as a serious (and well-deserved) contender for an Oscar win in just a few weeks. Even Dylan himself has praised Chalamet's portrayal.
The film is far from short, running at a hefty 140 minutes, but it moves swiftly and enjoyably. However, I believe it could have benefited from being slightly shorter, as there are a few moments that feel drawn out or unnecessary, and could have been trimmed to make the film more accessible to a wider audience. That being said, for the most part, the film is absolutely riveting, with many scenes that, despite their length, remain exciting from start to finish and feel like high-quality cinema. Additionally, even with its extended runtime, it serves as an exceptionally well-done character study, exploring Dylan's enigmatic persona and world in a way that highlights both his historical significance and influence on 1960s music and beyond-even for those who may not be deeply familiar with his music or story. If the real Dylan is pleased with the film, who am I to say otherwise?
The film's final act-without giving away spoilers-manages to be as powerful as intended, successfully illustrating and emphasizing the importance of artists who push the boundaries of music and dare to break free from the rigid categories often imposed on them by the public, the media, record labels, and even their most devoted fans. Many of them end up making history along the way. Where would we be without them?
A Complete Unknown is an immensely enjoyable biopic that manages to capture the atmosphere of the 1960s in a brilliant manner while presenting the story of one of the most important musicians of the previous century, while highlighting the importance of daring to break barriers in the music industry. With an awe-inspiring performance by Chalamet and the supporting cast, James Mangold managed to bring to life a magnificent film that I highly recommend- whether you are familiar with Dylan's music and legacy or not.
Conclave (2024)
Fascinating Social Study Told through the Eyes of Faith
It's always nice when a highly anticipated film lives up to expectations. With a stellar cast, largely positive early reactions, and a fascinating premise, 'Conclave' was one of my most anticipated films in the latter months of 2024. After watching it twice, I can confidently say that it met my high expectations. In fact, I consider it one of the best films of the year.
For those less familiar with the intricacies, fine details, and politics behind the papacy, there's no need to worry about feeling disconnected from the film's subject matter or struggling to understand the setting and bureaucracy of the conclave process it portrays. The film does an excellent job of making this topic accessible to all audiences. While the election of a new pope serves as the film's core storyline, the screenplay goes far beyond that, offering sharp dialogue and top-tier character exploration. Combined with the cast's outstanding performances and the film's excellent technical execution, I believe many viewers will find themselves engaged, even if the subject matter isn't something they'd typically be drawn to.
At first glance, the film may seem to focus solely on the process of electing a pope, but it masterfully explores numerous relevant societal themes-such as politics, faith, conservatism versus progressivism, and inclusivity. Naturally, it also touches on topics more closely associated with religious communities (not just Christianity), such as adapting centuries-old religious principles to the modern world. The film brilliantly presents discussions on these contemporary issues through the "parable," if you will, of selecting the most important figure in Christianity. If you're wondering, "How interesting can a papal election really be?", rest assured-the film is much more than that. It uses this premise as a compelling backdrop for tackling deeper, thought-provoking themes in a remarkably clever way.
One of the most striking aspects of the film is its star-studded cast, packed with A-list actors. Leading the charge is Ralph Fiennes, who carries the film with a powerful performance that will hopefully earn significant recognition during the current awards season. It's been a while since we've seen him lead a high-profile film in such a central role, and I savored every moment he was on screen. Alongside him, acting heavyweights like John Lithgow, Isabella Rossellini, and Stanley Tucci deliver impressive performances that elevate the viewing experience.
From a technical standpoint, this is a film of the highest caliber. The cinematography is exceptional, featuring numerous breathtaking shots-truly, about 90% of the frames could be standalone works of art. Of course, the stunning Vatican scenery adds to the film's visual appeal. The production design, costume design, and sharp editing all contribute to an immersive and captivating experience.
A standout element is Volker Bertelmann's brilliant score. At times reminiscent of 'Succession', the music feels dramatically intense compared to the scenes it accompanies, yet it does so in a charming and engaging way that draws viewers in from the very first note. Additionally, the score is an absolute pleasure to listen to outside the context of the film-something I personally value in film compositions.
The film was shot (unsurprisingly) in Rome in early 2023, with principal photography taking place at the famous Cinecittà Studios. The production designers meticulously recreated iconic locations such as the Sistine Chapel and other key Vatican sites, taking some creative liberties to enhance the film's dramatic impact. Costume designer Lisy Christl conducted extensive research, visiting workshops, historical tailors, and museums to accurately capture the essence of 17th-century Vatican attire. She aimed to blend historical inspiration with a visually striking aesthetic, making the film even more captivating.
Screenwriter Peter Straughan undertook extensive research to authentically portray the complexities of the papal election process. He studied the protocols of the conclave, approaching the subject with deep respect for its historical and religious significance. He even consulted with an actual cardinal to gain firsthand insight into the secret deliberations, voting system, and political dynamics of the process. Additionally, Straughan explored the Catholic Church's political history, collaborating with experts and historians to understand how political, social, and religious factors intertwine in papal elections.
With a meticulously calculated two-hour runtime, the film remains engaging from start to finish, featuring a dynamic storyline that continuously evolves in intriguing directions. The dialogues, as mentioned earlier, are excellent, tackling relevant contemporary issues in a subtle yet thought-provoking manner.
Ultimately, the film delivers a message-one that I won't spoil-but I will say that, in contrast to many modern films and TV shows, it conveys this message naturally and seamlessly, without feeling forced or artificial. As the credits roll, audiences are left feeling satisfied, with plenty to ponder afterward.
'Conclave' is, without a doubt, one of the finest films of 2024. With a captivating story, political intrigue, a masterful score, some of the most stunning cinematography in recent years, timely yet nuanced themes, and an unparalleled cast featuring some of the greatest actors of our time, I consider this film a must-watch. While some viewers may find certain aspects predictable or even tiring, I see it as a one-of-a-kind cinematic experience-crafted with excellence at every level.
Interstellar (2014)
Christopher Nolan's Interstellar Uniquely Blends Science, Science Fiction, and a Heartwarming Emotional Narrative
Interstellar is and always was one of my personal favorite films of all time. I first experienced the film in IMAX when it was released in 2014, and I've been a devoted admirer ever since. But this week, I was fortunate enough to be in New York precisely when the film was being re-screened in IMAX - and not just any IMAX, but in the grandeur of IMAX 70mm - as part of the 10th-anniversary celebrations of its release. Despite having seen the film several times before, rewatching it multiple times to mark its decade-long impact, in the magnificent IMAX theaters of the U. S., stands as one of the most extraordinary cinematic experiences we've had in our lives.
No matter how many times I watch the film, it always excites me, intrigues me, and also brings me to tears. A unique cinematic experience like no other, that pushes the boundaries of cinema and how science can be depicted in film.
The collaborative process between Christopher Nolan and his brother Jonathan (known for Memento, The Prestige, The Dark Knight, and Westworld, among other works) in crafting the screenplay united two brilliant but slightly different minds. This dynamic provided the creative friction that birthed such an extraordinary story. In the early stages, Jonathan was the principal screenwriter, entrusted with the task of shaping the script. He worked on the project for several years alongside producer Lynda Obst and theoretical physicist Kip Thorne. The original draft was heavily centered on the intricate scientific principles underpinning the plot, such as Einstein's theory of relativity and, in particular, the concept of time dilation.
When Christopher came on board as director, he reworked the script to emphasize the emotional and philosophical dimensions of the story. This shift - from a strict focus on science to one that balanced scientific rigor with emotional storytelling - became one of the defining aspects that granted the film its unparalleled strength. It is, ultimately, this synthesis of emotional depth with scientific exploration that elevates Interstellar to a truly extraordinary work within the sci-fi genre.
The scriptwriting process between the brothers included a continuous exchange of ideas at every stage of its development. Christopher's inclination toward emotional storytelling intertwined with Jonathan's passion for scientific precision and narrative complexity. As the film's director, Christopher also had the responsibility of translating Jonathan's abstract scientific concepts into compelling, visually stunning cinematic moments and images. This process enabled audiences to grasp abstract and extremely complicated scientific ideas through groundbreaking visual storytelling.
It's incredible to witness how, with the passage of time, Interstellar is increasingly recognized not only as a monumental chapter in Nolan's legendary filmography but also as a bona fide classic in the sci-fi genre. With the Nolans now receiving the broader recognition they deserve from the global film and television community (not just their core fanbase), more and more people now grasp the thematic essence the Nolans were striving for with the unique storytelling elements they insisted on including in Interstellar.
One of the most unique characteristics of Nolan as a filmmaker is his profound love and respect for science, as well as his understanding of its importance in both storytelling and real-world impact. This is reflected in the themes he chooses to explore, the logical framework behind his scripts, and the technical aspects of his filmmaking process. From project to project, he constantly experiments with new techniques that push the boundaries of film industry technology. He strives to maintain scientific accuracy in his narratives as much as possible while telling captivating stories that highlight the vital role of scientists and the value of intellect in the modern era.
Contrary to the common criticism that Nolan's films often sideline female characters, Interstellar features a significant and very welcome representation of strong, influential women in the field of science. Jessica Chastain and Anne Hathaway deliver compelling and charismatic performances, taking center stage in the film's unfolding events and playing a crucial role in the story's progression. Mackenzie Foy also impresses in a once-in-a-lifetime performance of a curious, intelligent, and ambitious child that doesn't shy from the performances of other veteran actors and actresses in the film, with a role that will surely inspire future generations of young viewers.
If we delve further into the unique collaborations behind the making of Interstellar, and to the film's unique property of depicting science in the most accurate way possible, the extraordinary partnership between Christopher Nolan and theoretical physicist Kip Thorne stands out as one of the film's most intriguing aspects. This collaboration was paradigm-shifting in its own right, as it sought to depict Einstein's theory of relativity as accurately as possible on screen. Instead of resorting to clichés or convenient narrative shortcuts, Thorne, a Nobel Prize-winning theoretical physicist, acted as both scientific consultant and producer of the film. His primary role was to ensure that depictions of black holes, wormholes, and the effects of relativity on time dilation were as scientifically accurate as possible.
Maintaining scientific precision required a delicate balance between creative cinematic storytelling and the constraints of established physics. While Nolan, known for his narrative complexity and visual ambition, occasionally sought to introduce elements that bent the rules of physics, Thorne firmly insisted on absolute scientific accuracy. This principle of realism shaped not only the depiction of time dilation but also the emotional and philosophical core of the film, where time itself becomes a central, emotionally charged narrative device. Their collaboration continues to set a gold standard for how science can be faithfully integrated into cinematic storytelling.
After watching the film in an IMAX theater in the U. S. this week, I noticed a group of young students from a school or some sort of academic club attending the screening. They even took a group photo afterward to commemorate the experience. If that doesn't highlight Nolan's influence in inspiring future generations of innovators and scientists, we don't know what does.
Of course, no discussion of Interstellar would be complete without mentioning Hans Zimmer's phenomenal score, which the legendary composer himself has referred to as his most cherished soundtrack in his extensive career.
The process of collaboration between Zimmer and Nolan was unconventional and experimental compared to their previous collaborations. Instead of supplying Zimmer with a script or a detailed plot outline, Nolan wrote him a one-page letter describing the film's central emotional core - the relationship between a father and his daughter - and asked him to compose from that emotional premise alone. Without knowing that it was a sci-fi epic, Zimmer crafted an intimate and deeply moving score built around a church organ, capturing the emotional anchor of the story. This approach yielded a score that felt personal and evocative, rather than tethered to the spectacle typically associated with the sci-fi genre. The two also chose to emphasized the use of a church organ to evoke a sense of cosmic awe and spiritual transcendence. Ultimately, the focus on emotional authenticity, rather than bombastic spectacle, produced a soundtrack that has become one of Zimmer's most celebrated works, earning critical acclaim and nominations for the Academy Award and the Grammy.
In a typical fashion to Zimmer's groundbreaking works, Interstellar did not initially receive the recognition it deserved from major award bodies like the Oscars or the Golden Globes. But history tends to favor the enduring, and today the Interstellar soundtrack is regarded as one of the most powerful and timeless film scores ever created. The raw emotional resonance it evokes during the film, and even while listening to it completely outside of watching the film, is nothing short of extraordinary.
Even generally speaking, looking back at the awards season following the film's release, the Academy's reluctance to recognize Interstellar and Nolan's achievements while creating the film remains truly baffling. Nolan did not receive nominations for Best Director or Best Original Screenplay, decisions that now seem glaringly questionable in hindsight. Particularly when compared to certain contemporaneous winners, like Alfonso Cuarón's Gravity, which Interstellar, in comparison, stands head and shoulders above in ambition, visual storytelling, and philosophical depth in our opinion. With Nolan's triumphant sweep during awards season for Oppenheimer, one can only hope that the Academy will, in the future, be more open to recognizing his contributions to the Sci-Fi genre, which has long been overlooked at such ceremonies.
What might have been an open question 10 years ago is now clear: Interstellar has cemented its place in the annals of cinematic history as one of the greatest and most important Science Fiction films of all time. Its scientific precision, gripping narrative, breathtaking visuals, extraordinary performances, masterful soundtrack, and impeccable execution on all fronts have earned it a rightful place as one of the most iconic films to ever grace the silver screen.
And above all, it's a whole lot of fun.
Gladiator II (2024)
A Very Entertaining Sequel to a Classic, Albeit One that Nobody Asked For
"Gladiator 2" has arrived-a sequel to one of the most successful and memorable films from the start of this century. From the trailer alone, it's clear that this is a "lite" sequel, at least in its premise: while the first film serves as important background to events in this one, the characters are almost entirely different. The decision to make a sequel to such a classic, one that wasn't particularly necessary (some might even say it's strictly unnecessary), seemed a bit puzzling. Nevertheless, with Ridley Scott at the helm, we approached it with an open mind, ready to give him a chance to prove it was the right choice. So, what's the verdict?
It's hard to say that the sequel was truly necessary. This isn't a "Better Call Saul" to "Breaking Bad" scenario where the sequel or prequel genuinely enriches the story to the point that it's hard to imagine the franchise without it. Instead, we get a good film-make no mistake (and the rating reflects that)-set in the same universe and connected to the original in more ways than expected, as it ties up (or expands upon) many storylines. If we continue with the "Breaking Bad" analogy, it feels more like "El Camino"-good in itself but not particularly essential or on par with the original.
The acting in this film is one of its strongest points right from the start, as any sequel to "Gladiator" needs a cast capable of shouldering the task. Paul Mescal gives a performance that's quite different from what we're used to seeing from him; up until now, he's mostly been known for melancholy dramas like "Aftersun" and "All of Us Strangers," both tearjerkers. Here, we see Mescal in full battle mode, in a much more physical and combative role-a side we haven't really seen from him before. And he pulls it off excellently.
Pedro Pascal, who is no stranger to testosterone-heavy combat in armor, brings his usual strong performance. Joseph Quinn and Fred Hechinger are impressive as Emperors Geta and Caracalla, and Connie Nielsen and Derek Jacobi return to their original roles from the first film. But the real MVP here is Denzel Washington, a phenomenal actor in any case, who easily outshines everyone with his complex and fascinating character portrayal. It's clear that he had a blast on set, and it shows in his performance.
While the original film was essentially a drama with plenty of action, the case is similar here but with more emphasis on action over story, message, or character arcs. The movie contains a lot of impressive battle scenes, where Ridley Scott proves his reputation as one of the great directors of our time. The choreography and cinematography of the action scenes are meticulously crafted, and Scott handles the "chaotic" scenes with remarkable skill, where many things happen at once across different parts of the "stage" and frame. Even in an era where period dramas with massive production values and huge budgets are everywhere, Scott manages to deliver a spectacle with sequences that feel as high-quality as they come, blowing the competition out the waters.
This brings us to another key point about the film-if you view it less as an attempt to meet the standards set by the first movie and more as a chance to spend two and a half enjoyable hours in the cinema, the result is very successful. The film relies quite a bit on its predecessor but also stands well on its own. Anyone looking for a thrilling, fun movie experience, with some of the most impressive action scenes in recent years, will certainly enjoy it.
In terms of production values, it's no surprise that the film levels up from the original. The set design, costumes, visual effects, and everything else are top-notch, making it a visually impressive experience.
While Harry Gregson-Williams' (excellent) score for the film was solid, one of the most memorable elements from the original film was Hans Zimmer's iconic score (with Lisa Gerrard). The decision not to bring them back for the sequel is completely baffling; it's unclear who to blame here (certainly not Gregson-Williams), but one can't help but wonder how the film would have sounded with the original musicians adding a new twist to the foundations they laid. Still, as noted, the film's score was good and effectively set the atmosphere, though musically it diverged from the style of the first movie, which is a bit problematic when it's a sequel (especially given the iconic nature of the original score). It always favorable to include references to the original themes, and it was done rather well in this film, apart from one instance where the original score is reused, which felt unnecessary and only emphasized the dissonance between the two soundtracks.
One of the issues apparent while watching the film (not the movie's fault per se, but rather a fault of its marketing) is that some key plot details only emerge an hour or more into the movie but were shown in the trailer and the movie's summary as part of the plot framework. Those who come in unsullied might be surprised and enjoy the natural progression of the plot and story more, whereas those who saw the trailer or read even a basic synopsis will know things they "shouldn't" in the first act, which is a bit disappointing. In short-if you haven't seen the trailer, don't watch it.
In conclusion-was a sequel to the classic "Gladiator" necessary? Not at all. The first film's story was beautifully self-contained from beginning to end and is still regarded as one of the most important films of the early millennium. Nevertheless, given that they did choose to make a sequel, the result is pretty good and enjoyable, and far from a disaster. The film continues the story of the first in a way that feels very natural, providing an engaging story and a fun viewing experience, though it clearly doesn't match the original. For fans of the first film, we highly recommend seeing it, but even for those just looking for a good time at the movies and wanting to see one of the best spectacle directors of our time work his magic on one of the best films of recent years-and one of the most entertaining of 2024-it's a worthwhile watch.
By Dvir971 & Orr971.
The Wild Robot (2024)
An Enjoyable and Touching Viewing Experience with Breathtaking Animation
"The Wild Robot" is one of the most talked-about animated films in recent years, gaining a lot of hype after early screenings at festivals and similar events. For example, despite the immense success of "Inside Out 2", which also received excellent reviews from both critics and audiences, "The Wild Robot" is currently positioned as the frontrunner for the Oscar for Best Animated Feature. I must admit I was initially skeptical about such extreme praise, and considering the plot summary, I didn't see how it could bring anything new. Fortunately, I was wrong, and the film largely lived up to the high expectations I had for it.
The film primarily follows Roz, an advanced robot who finds herself stranded in a forest on a remote island. As she learns to adapt and survive in nature, Roz also has to deal with the hostile environment and animals that view her as a "monster," all while taking an orphaned gosling under her care.
The story of the film seems fairly simple on the surface, and as I mentioned, I didn't see how it could bring anything fresh. To my surprise, there was much more depth than the trailer or basic plot implied. In a time when the world is more divided than ever, the film delivers a message of unity and acceptance of differences against a backdrop of global industrialization. It emphasizes the role-and the fear of the role-of artificial intelligence in daily life, highlighting the importance of preserving nature and keeping warmth, character, and human instincts alive in an increasingly robotic and cold age.
The most prominent strength of the film, in my opinion, is the animation. While it's not overly "abstract" and does appear realistic, it seems realism was only a secondary priority for the animators. The emphasis was on creating a rich, innovative, and visually stunning texture. As seen in recent animated films (such as "Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse"), it's refreshing to see movies of this type taking bold and creative approaches, focusing less on mimicking reality and more on delivering a unique experience and atmosphere.
The film's production design team described their approach as combining digital technology with artistic realism in an impressionistic style. The animators aimed to create a landscape that feels somewhat like a handmade artwork, focusing on textures reminiscent of brushstrokes to give nature and movement a natural flow. Almost every frame in the film is breathtaking; it's a joy to look at the screen and "feel" nature as intended by the director.
Additionally, the director noted that the film aimed to use dynamic camera work inspired by nature documentaries, with "realistic" handheld movements designed to immerse viewers in the natural scenes. This approach aimed to make the audience feel comfortable while still avoiding absolute realism-again, intending for the film to feel like a "living painting" rather than a 3D animated attempt to replicate reality as closely as possible.
Regarding the characters, the facial expressions and rich movements of the animals contrasted with Roz's mechanical motions, providing another point of strength in the animation. Combined with excellent voice acting from a cast that includes several big names, they managed to convey the emotions and intentions of the animals warmly and convincingly (as much as talking animals can), while Roz's robotic movements also managed to convey warmth and emotion in just the right amount, especially as the film progressed.
Overall, it's an enjoyable and touching viewing experience. The story, as mentioned, sounds fairly simple but manages to surprise and explore interesting paths, filling the film's runtime precisely without dragging on or making the audience wish things would move faster. The film offers an incredible blend of fun, stunning technical aspects, a good story, a good script, and even a message-all the elements you could want from an animated film trying to be a little more than what we usually see.
"The Wild Robot" is undoubtedly one of the most refreshing animated films of recent years. A unique visual experience combined with a beautiful, moving story that leaves viewers with food for thought afterward. Like the great animated films, this is a movie that both children and adults can enjoy, with each person drawing something that aligns with their worldview at their age. Therefore, I highly recommend watching the film and enjoying this unique experience, and perhaps even considering bringing along the next generation of cinema lovers.
Venom: The Last Dance (2024)
An Extremely Entertaining, if Not Hilarious, Self-Satire
Venom was a villain mostly remembered from the iconic "Spider-Man 3" with Tobey Maguire. Back then, it was played by Topher Grace and since then Venom faded a bit among general audiences, until he was revived in the rebooted franchise with Tom Hardy.
The previous two films in the series got a lot of hate and over-criticism due to unnecessary comparisons with the Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU). While MCU films take themselves very seriously (some maybe even a bit too seriously for what they actually are), I think it's best to approach the Venom films with the expectation that they'll be what they're trying to be: fun, silly, and humorous action films, almost halfway to comedy, that make for an enjoyable time. Unsurprisingly, "The Last Dance" (brilliant title, mind you) continues this tone, and I thoroughly enjoyed watching it in an IMAX theater. This isn't a terrible travesty like "Madame Web", but rather a self-parodying comic book movie that doesn't try to be more than it is. And it's just a lot of fun. In fact, it's funnier than many comedies I've seen in recent years.
While Dvir watched the first two films, for Or, this is the first in the series. So he provides the perspective of a new viewer. Can you enjoy the movie even if you haven't seen the first two? Absolutely yes. He even asked his longtime friend ChatGPT for the main plotlines of the first two films, which weren't really necessary while watching this one (maybe only for some background context). It seems this was anticipated, as a comic blockbuster, especially one that's the third in a series, needs to be accessible to as many viewers as possible. In Dvir's opinion, it's undoubtedly the best film of the trilogy.
We think the creators successfully made a mix of "unintentional comedy" and genuine parody of comic book films, especially of Marvel. This type of comedy may seem unintentional but is very deliberate. On the surface, it's an action drama, right? Comics, fun, chaos, explosions. But in truth, it's so perfectly self-aware that it's hard to ignore. They probably knew a serious film wouldn't be well-received and that attempting one would only anger audiences. So they created a parody of sorts, a movie that is completely aware what it is.
What's enjoyable and fun is that these aren't typical comedy film punchlines; the humor is casual and incidental. Moments that might seem ridiculous to someone expecting a "serious movie" are just hilariously entertaining to those who came to have a good time. Even the existence of post-credit scenes (there are two) is a perfect parody of post-credits, done so nonchalantly.
Don't let the generous score fool you-the movie isn't without flaws, and they are very present mainly in the script. Plot holes, shortcuts, strange character decisions, and other issues are present from start to finish. But again, we didn't come to this movie expecting high cinema; we just came for fun, and it definitely delivers on that front. And to be honest, many of these flaws actually add to the film's comedic side and to its character as a self-aware parody that knows exactly what it's trying to be.
Tom Hardy, a top-notch actor, delivers an amazing performance as usual, sometimes even seeming a bit too good for this type of movie. The film is based heavily on comedy and doesn't take itself seriously at all, and Hardy throws himself into the comedic role impressively, carrying the movie with his physical acting and voice work. The rest of the cast also does a great job, especially Rhys Ifans in a hilarious role. But ultimately, Hardy is the star and shines as always, completely stealing the show (twice).
We were surprised to discover that the cinematography was done by none other than Emmy-nominated Fabian Wagner, one of the industry's talented cinematographers who shot key episodes of "Game of Thrones", "Sherlock", "The Crown", and more. He definitely did an excellent job here. The effects were great as expected, and overall, the movie delivered very fun and enjoyable action in addition to everything else.
"Venom: The Last Dance" is pure fun at the end of the day. It's sometimes laugh-out-loud funny, mainly because it doesn't take itself seriously. Don't go into it expecting "Oppenheimer 2", "The Godfather Part. 4", or even "The Avengers 28", but instead be prepared for a fun hour and a half in a cinema, with action, effects, a serviceable story, and lots of laughs. We enjoyed it. Just please don't come with a heavy mindset; a tipsy one might work better.
By Dvir971 & Orr971.
Matchmaking 2 (2024)
A Decent Sequel and a Very Entertaining Viewing Experience
The world of matchmaking is one that, for many of us is distant. Nonetheless, there's something undeniably intriguing about it, especially for those unfamiliar with it. That's why, when they decided to take a satirical, humorous approach that brings this topic to a broad audience, the result was "Matchmaking". The first movie effectively kicked off this concept and did it wonderfully with humor and ease. It was a fun movie that flew by and felt "complete" - a story that began and ended. But now, two years later, the sequel has arrived. Is there more to tell, or is it just stretching things out? Well, yes, there is more to tell.
While Orr watched the first film before seeing the second, for Dvir, it was his first encounter with the characters and the movie's world, providing a fresh viewer's perspective. Can you enjoy the sequel without having seen the first movie? Absolutely. It feels like, despite being based on characters and storylines from the first film, this movie is pretty self-contained, and there's no real need to know the previous story in detail to fully enjoy it. Of course, it's always good to catch up or read a short summary, but if someone's looking for an entertaining watch and is considering this film, they shouldn't hesitate to dive in even without having seen the original.
As people connected in a certain degree to Jewish culture and tradition, we enjoyed the humor and writing, and we found the script to feel both natural and comically satirical without mocking these worlds - quite the opposite. Judging by the reactions of people who watched the movie with us or were in the theater, we feel that even those less familiar with or connected to this world can relate to the story and setting. The humor and narrative aren't niche in a way that only a specific segment of the population would enjoy.
On the acting front, there are a few familiar faces from the first film and some new ones. Maor Schweitzer, who stole the show in the first movie, even though he wasn't the main character, is now at the center and, just like in the first film, is hilarious and plays his role wonderfully. In the sequel, Niv Sultan also joins the cast and plays her part excellently. There's a funny layer to the fact that this is a movie about matchmaking, and she's married to Schweitzer in real life. Overall, the cast is genuinely strong. We must mention Hitam Omari, who plays the yeshiva's kitchen manager - every scene with him is extremely funny.
In recent years, perhaps because of the ease of drawing audiences through the "influencer and followers" method, there's been a trend of models and internet celebrities/influencers becoming actors overnight. In this film, however, it feels like Omer Nudelman brings a lot more than just that. She delivers a very good and captivating performance unrelated to her background as a model. It's wonderful to see a real case of hidden talent being brought to light, and her performance was one of the movie's standout strengths.
Romantic comedies aren't a genre that's particularly common in Israel, and it's nice to see that they did it right here. Personally, it's not our "cup of tea," but we thoroughly enjoyed the movie, and we believe it's a very successful and fun Israeli production.
"Matchmaking 2" is a fantastic continuation of its predecessor, offering a very entertaining and funny viewing experience. It's a charming comedy that manages to touch the heart, with a great story and very natural humor. The actors perform their roles very well, and from every angle, the film is made with skill. Most importantly, it's a delightful way to spend an hour and a half in the cinema, and we'd highly recommend it to those who enjoy the genre - even if they haven't seen the first movie.
By Dvir971 & Orr971.
Batman Begins (2005)
A Genre Redefining Classic
Aside from being one of the most successful and best comic book movies of all time, Batman Begins is, in my opinion, one of the most important films for 21st-century pop culture. Along with launching the career of the greatest filmmaker of his generation, Sir Christopher Nolan, the film managed to reinvent an entire genre, and its influence is still felt in cinema today.
After most of the previous Batman movies from Warner Bros. - most notably Batman & Robin - were colossal failures and even considered a joke today, the studio realized the need to pivot strategy and reboot the entire concept with a completely different approach. The guiding principle was to return to the darker and more complex roots of the Dark Knight's character, reintroducing it to a modern audience with a focus on the character's origins and psychological depth.
After impressing Warner Bros. With his previous works, especially the psychological thrillers Memento and Insomnia, a young and promising director named Christopher Nolan was recruited to give his personal spin on the task. Nolan's ability to handle complex characters and non-linear storytelling caught the producers' attention, particularly Steven Soderbergh, who helped convince Warner to give Nolan a chance. In a manner that now seems very typical of him, Nolan wanted to explore the character's journey in a serious, realistic, and emotional way, abandoning the fantastical and "campy" tone of previous films while drawing inspiration from movies like Ridley Scott's Blade Runner and Richard Donner's Superman. He teamed up with screenwriter David S. Goyer, who had extensive experience adapting comic books, and together they crafted a story that explored the origin of Bruce Wayne's transformation from a spoiled rich kid to a crime-fighting vigilante. Christopher's brother, Jonathan Nolan, was also present on set and assisted them in the process.
The Nolans' approach received positive feedback from the studio, and Warner gave Chris full creative control to reinvent the character and tell the story in the way he saw fit. Thus began, officially, the journey of the greatest blockbuster director of this century.
In their first of many collaborations, Nolan brought in the legendary composer Hans Zimmer, alongside James Newton Howard, to provide the film's score. In my view, these two played a significant role in transforming the film from a comic book movie, as we were used to seeing them until then, into the unique masterpiece it is. The soundtrack is one of the most iconic in the action genre, combining dramatic and emotional music with epic, nerve-wracking action scores when needed, as Zimmer does so well. In my opinion, this is one of the film's most outstanding aspects, which would later evolve and reach new heights in the sequels of the trilogy.
Naturally, the casting of the film played a central role in shaping the tone and world with the unique characteristics Nolan sought to create. At the time, Christian Bale was known for his versatile performances and extraordinary dedication, making him a leading candidate in Nolan's eyes-a choice that seemed unconventional at the time. In hindsight, many consider this a very wise decision, as Bale is still regarded as one of the best Batmans in live-action adaptations. Beyond the physical transformation Bale underwent (another thing he's famous for), his portrayal of Bruce Wayne as an arrogant and spoiled playboy, contrasted with his dark and calculated performance as Batman, is praiseworthy.
The one-of-a-kind Cillian Murphy, who originally auditioned for the role of Bruce Wayne, also caught Nolan's eye. Though Murphy wasn't chosen for the lead role, Nolan was very impressed with his presence (especially his gaze and eyes) and offered him the role of the villain-the Scarecrow. Murphy's chilling and masterful performance added a psychological, even slightly horror-like, element to the film. Above all, it marked the beginning of a wonderful friendship between Nolan and Murphy, who have collaborated many times throughout their careers, with both winning Oscars for Oppenheimer a little less than a year ago. For the role of Alfred, Sir Michael Caine was Nolan's first choice. There isn't much more to add here, and I think most people would agree that this is the most successful cinematic interpretation of the character to date.
In its first half, the movie is a complete drama. It takes quite some time before any action occurs or even before Batman is seen in costume. In my eyes, this is one of the things that highlights how incredible this film is and how it prioritizes the story, characters, and plot over cheap thrills. As a hero origin story, it was important to Nolan to establish the world in which the film takes place, give the audience a deep understanding of the characters and their motivations, and let the story flow naturally until the "action" part of the plot arrives. While this approach has since been adopted by many blockbusters, not all of them do it as smoothly and naturally as Nolan.
The film's ending is also quite unconventional. Some might say that by the end, the conflict is not entirely resolved, and those who were in theaters in 2005-before the age of social media and spoilers-probably remember the audible excitement in the theater during the last 30 iconic seconds. This is another point that sets this movie apart from others in the genre: it manages to leave the audience wanting more and presents a long-term vision for the world it builds while still delivering a satisfying resolution to the story presented in the film; a growth in the right direction in the shadow of the escalation in Gotham City that builds the tension towards the next movie. All this within the main plot, without relying on post-credit scenes or cameo appearances.
Batman Begins essentially laid the foundation for Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy, which is still considered one of the most acclaimed and influential trilogies in modern cinema. While the sequel is regarded by many as the best in the trilogy (and one of the best films of all time), it's only fitting to give Batman Begins the credit it deserves for its tremendous impact on the comic book movie genre. The film set a new standard for superhero movies and opened the door (essentially serving as the blueprint) for more mature and realistic comic book adaptations that followed, such as Zack Snyder's Watchmen and, of course, Iron Man, which launched the Marvel Cinematic Universe.
The film was a massive success, both critically and financially, and was praised for the dark and realistic approach it offered the superhero genre. Critics and audiences alike lauded Nolan's work, who was relatively "unknown" at the time, as both director and screenwriter. As an incredible success story for Warner, and in typical Nolan fashion, the film revived the franchise after the disaster of the previous movies and earned over $370 million worldwide. Down the road, the entire trilogy grossed over $2 billion during its theatrical run worldwide.
On a more personal note, Batman Begins is one of the movies I love revisiting every now and then. While I also believe it's not the best in Nolan's masterful trilogy, it's the one I've probably watched the most times.
From the wonderful music, the deep character exploration, the enjoyable action scenes, the captivating story, and Nolan's perfect execution, Batman Begins retains its status as one of the best comic book movies of all time. Despite reinventing the genre and setting a whole new bar for it, I always feel that it's somewhat unfair to categorize it as a "comic book movie" because, despite my immense appreciation for the genre, the film stands on its own as a masterpiece of psychological crime drama/thriller and often feels more like that. To this day, it's the best take on Batman's story in my opinion, especially for his origin story-a fantastic way to reintroduce the character to the public and start a trilogy that tells a story with a beginning, middle, and end.
And beyond that, as a big fan of Sir Christopher Nolan, perhaps one of the reasons I keep returning to this movie is that you can think of the story behind it as a Hero Origin Story in itself - the one of the greatest filmmaker of recent times.
Megalopolis (2024)
"Cinema is Something Alive and Ever-Changing"
Winner of 5 Academy Awards and the man behind the legendary "Godfather" trilogy, Francis Ford Coppola, returns to cinema with a passion project that has been in the making for decades. After early screenings at festivals, some viewers described the film as a groundbreaking masterpiece, while many others called it an outright disaster and one of the worst films they had ever seen in a theater. All of this, of course, was enough to intrigue me to watch the film in IMAX on opening day. While the film is far from being bad, it's also hard to go to the other extreme and call it a masterpiece. Nonetheless, it offers a unique cinematic experience that feels somewhat like cinema from the future, and in my opinion, it's highly recommended to experience it on the big screen.
Coppola has dreamed of making "Megalopolis" for decades-since the 1980s, in fact. He began early production in the early 2000s and even managed to shoot some footage in New York, but the project was shelved after the 9/11 attacks, which made the film's themes and certain parts of the original script feel sensitive and in very poor taste for the time. In the years that followed, he struggled to secure funding for the project while maintaining his (ambitious, in his view) vision for it, and only in the 2020s, with renewed backing from studios and a significant amount of his own financial investment, was he able to revive the project. The new version of the script was aimed at an independent production on a massive scale, reflecting Coppola's ideas about society, politics, and art, while attempting to make boundary-breaking cinema-something that hadn't been done before.
A quick glance at the film's rating histogram on the Letterboxd site (as of now) shows that Coppola managed to create something truly exceptional with this project. I can't remember the last time I encountered such a distribution of ratings for a film, with nearly every possible rating receiving almost equal numbers of votes. It's a rare case of a film where its early viewers couldn't reach any consensus at all, with reactions ranging across the spectrum from colossal disaster to a one-time masterpiece-and everything in between. It feels like an ideal distribution for a film whose primary goal is to make viewers raise an eyebrow and think outside the box.
"The movies your grandchildren will make are not going to be like this formula happening now. We can't even imagine what it's going to be, and that's the wonderful thing about it. The notion that there's a set of rules to make a film - you have to have this, you have to have that - that's OK if you're making Coca-Cola because you want to know that you're going to be able to sell it without risk. But cinema is not Coca-Cola. Cinema is something alive and ever-changing." - Francis Ford Coppola
Personally, I'm a big fan of unconventional storytelling. Cinema has existed for decades, and following predefined patterns of how a movie "should" look and how a story "ought" to be written has been done in countless films. While this approach certainly works well in the context of many movies (after all, there's a reason it's become the norm), I feel it's long past being necessary, and any departure from this formula is intriguing and even most welcome. It seems Coppola came to the film with exactly this mindset, and the technical and visual aspects certainly delivered the goods, offering a one-of-a-kind cinematic experience. However, in terms of plot and screenplay, the film falls short, which left me somewhat disappointed.
Anyone looking for a coherent and well-written story has come to the wrong place. While the film's plot isn't bad, it plays a secondary role to technical aspects like visuals, editing, music, and so on-or in a broader sense, the experience of watching it. Personally, I felt a lack of world-building that would explain some of the elements presented in the film as if they were self-evident, and many times the story felt quite messy. Additionally, while the plot builds reasonably well in the first two acts of the film, it feels like the third act rushes to close the story in a way that seems a bit lacking and too hasty.
As criticized a lot regarding the movie, it deals with tons of themes and subjects, and it seems like Coppola had a strong statement to say in all of these subjects. While succeeding in some, the message again falls short in most of them and it feels like more polishing to the script, and even an additional running time would have helped tremendously.
The film boasts an impressive cast filled with great actors and big names, which seems unnecessary to go through one by one since, as an ensemble, they did an excellent job and matched their performances to the film's theatrical and fable-y style. In terms of direction, not much needs to be said-this is Francis Ford Coppola, after all, and you can clearly see the work of a professional here.
But if we focus on the "experience" aspect-the film does an amazing job, and just for that, I would highly recommend watching it, especially in an IMAX theater. The cinematography is among the most impressive I've seen this year, the editing is dynamic and excellent, the musical choices and their use are perfect, and overall, Coppola managed to make 140 minutes fly by with great enjoyment, delivering a unique and impressive cinematic display.
It's hard to ignore the negative buzz surrounding the film on social media, but in my personal opinion, it's worth seeing it and judging for yourself. It's definitely not a film for everyone, but as I mentioned, it offers a unique cinematic experience and is a very unusual movie-in the best possible way (in my personal view). The movie has many flaws, but as an overall ambitious experience it definitely delivers. Without a doubt, it's a film I can see myself going to watch again soon, as there's a lot to digest and analyze here and because it was just so much fun.
Come Closer (2024)
Extraordinary and Gripping Piece of Cinema
"Come Closer" by Tom Nesher was one of the most prominent Israeli films presented at many festivals and screenings, and the hype for it was real. Therefore, I came with high expectations for a very high-quality film, and I was not disappointed in the slightest. In fact, I believe it's one of the best and most important Israeli films of recent years, and I highly recommend watching it.
In the lead role, Lia Elalouf, appearing for the first time on a feature film, portrays one of the most complex and emotionally charged characters I've seen in recent times, especially in Israeli cinema. The recent Ophir Award winner (for her first cinematic role!) delivered an amazing performance, showcasing the character's complex emotions and unique personality in an extraordinary way.
Also making her debut on the big screen, Daria Rosen plays the supporting role in the film and delivers breathtaking acting that deeply impressed me. She too received a nomination for the Ophir Award (again, impressively for a first film role), and it's certainly deserved. With a character somewhat opposite in personality to Elalouf's, she also succeeds in presenting complex emotions and internal conflicts in an amazing yet fundamentally different way, offering another perspective on coping with grief after the loss of a loved one. Together, Elalouf and Rosen lead the film as the professionals they are and serve as its beating heart, as well as the heart of the story it seeks to convey.
Without spoiling or delving into specific plot details, just a quick glance at the film's synopsis shows that it deals with a very painful and difficult subject, and in my opinion, it successfully handles this task. The film is deeply moving, and I believe that Tom Nesher's script, which she says is based on "real emotion," conveys this emotion beautifully, personally and intimately through the camera lens. As mentioned, the lead actresses carry the film, but they do not do so without being supported by a talented crew in cinematography, editing, costumes, set design, and more. The musical choices often take the viewer by surprise with impressive contrasts to what's happening on screen (in a positive and refreshing way) and add another layer to the viewing experience. The original score composed for the film is also moving and serves as a wonderful and essential addition.
Tom Nesher, in her first full-length feature film, masterfully orchestrates the process in what feels like the work of a seasoned filmmaker. Her true talent is evident in every moment on screen-in both writing and directing. It feels grand yet also intimate and focused at the same time. The film's Ophir Award win is well-deserved, and Tom Nesher is emerging as a brilliant filmmaker, with the Israeli film industry's eyes on her as one of the most promising names of recent years. It's no surprise when I say I foresee a bright future for her in her career, and this is undoubtedly just the beginning.
"Come Closer" is a powerful and gripping Israeli creation, and one of the best films made in the country in recent years. It's hard to miss the film's sweeping success at festivals and award ceremonies, and it's always exciting to see this happen for a film that so fully deserves it. I highly recommend going to see it and experiencing one of the most unique stories presented on screen in recent years, and supporting a work that I'm proud to see representing Israel at the Oscars and various other international award ceremonies. As a joint creation led by Nesher, Elalouf, and Rosen, this is a stirring experience and a very brave film-may there be more like it in Israeli cinema.
Beetlejuice Beetlejuice (2024)
A Highly Entertaining Sequel and a Very Good Time
Since I watched the original movie only recently, I didn't come to this movie with huge anticipation. In that sense I might judge it differently than someone who was a fan of the classic, so keep that in mind.
Overall, I had a very good time, and I think the movie is a decent continuation of the cult classic. Alfred Gough and Miles Millar, who I've been a fan of since watching "Smallville" as a child, bring their unique storytelling style to the world of *Beetlejuice* in a movie that is very different from its predecessor, but in a fresh way that also respects the original.
Tim Burton, of course, brings his unique style, and this certainly feels like a Tim Burton movie in every sense of the word. The visual effects and production design are beautifully crafted, with that classic feeling of Burton films from the '80s and '90s, but enhanced with today's technologies and more extensive options.
The acting in the movie was excellent from all parties involved. Michael Keaton, in the iconic role, looks and behaves exactly the same, as if 36 years haven't passed since filming the first movie. Winona Ryder, who has become a much more experienced actress since the original film, leads the film proudly, and the great Justin Theroux is hilariously funny in his unique way. Jenna Ortega, while delivering a good performance, feels a bit overexposed to me in recent years, with the sense that her presence is unavoidable wherever you look. I would love to see her take on a more challenging role that presents a drastically different performance from what she usually does, to justify the hype. Another standout performance in the film was Willem Dafoe's, in an excellent and unconventional comedic role. Overall, the cast is packed with big names that are always a delight to see on screen.
Another strength of the movie is the musical aspect - something the first movie was very famous for. From a good choice of songs, especially fun "musical numbers," references to classics from the first movie, and in particular, a slightly different spin on Danny Elfman's iconic and wonderful theme music that will thrill any fan of the classic film.
In general, while I watched the first movie just recently, it's impossible to ignore the amount of fan service in this movie for fans of the classic film - and I mean that in the most positive way possible. It's not the modern, tiring fan service seen in quite a few franchise movies lately, but rather something that honors the original and gives fans who have been waiting for a sequel what they wanted, doing so in a logical, enjoyable way that remains true to the spirit of the story and what cinema should be.
While not a masterpiece or anything of that sort, I had a great time watching this film in IMAX, and I would recommend it to everyone - fans of the original and casual viewers alike.
Blink Twice (2024)
Extraordinary Debut for Kravitz
'Blink Twice' was truly a pleasant surprise, and one of the most entertaining movies of the year.
Zoë Kravitz made her directorial debut with a film she wrote and directed, and she managed to gather a truly stellar cast. Channing Tatum, Christian Slater, The legendary Kyle MacLachlan and many more. Above all, Naomi Ackie manages to carry the film in an amazing way, with a captivating, impressive, and very charismatic performance. Since the movie has so many plot twists, it's difficult to praise the other performances without getting into spoilers, but I can only say that the impressive cast does a really successful job here.
It's truly surprising to think that this is the first film Kravitz has written and directed because it feels like the work of a very experienced and talented screenwriter and director. The movie is made and structured very well, and it seems that during her years as an actress, she learned a lot from the people she worked with, and her debut film is far from looking like the first film of a filmmaker. A very professional job from all angles. If she continues in this direction, I see great achievements in her future.
Although the film is a psychological thriller, Kravitz managed to blend the genre with a lot of humor. There are several moments in the film that will surely shock many viewers, especially with the way they come out of nowhere, and the fact that they are flanked by humorous scenes on both sides is quite unusual, reminiscent of early Guy Ritchie films or even Quentin Tarantino's extreme dark humor.
The film's length is very compact, and I feel that its pacing was just right. Although it took a little too long to "get into things," the tension and mystery are built very effectively throughout the film, keeping the viewer on the edge of their seat, eager to see and know more. Additionally, the very ending of the story feels a bit odd and even slightly rushed, containing two or three holes and points that raise questions ("how and why did this happen if such and such?").
The soundtrack, as minimalist as it is, it adds a lot of atmosphere. Less is more, in this case. Additionally, the sound editing in the film was very impressive and added to the atmosphere of tension that the movie tries to build from the very first moment. The cinematography is also very impressive, and in general, this film feels very high-quality in its technical aspects.
In my opinion, this is one of the most surprising and entertaining films of the past year. I really enjoyed watching it, but it's important to come prepared for a pretty wild film that's completely without restraint. On the one hand, the movie is full of humor, but on the other hand, expect some pretty harsh things to watch. Zoë Kravitz pleasantly surprises with her first film, and I hope that beyond a successful acting career, she will continue in this direction as a director/screenwriter and bring us more original and surprising films like this one.
Alien: Romulus (2024)
A Thrilling Cinematic Experience
After a lot of anticipation and build-up, "Romulus" is here and it is a very decent addition to the "Alien" saga.
One of the most praiseworthy aspects of this film series is how the "Alien" series manages to achieve a rather rare blend of genres. This series, and especially this film more than any other, manages to create a rare combination of the Sci-Fi and the Horror genre, delivering a film with all the motifs of a horror movie but set in a science fiction setting. Ghosts? Demons? Serial killers? What if, for a change, they were Aliens? This refreshing combination is what makes the film series so fascinating and unique, and this film, made by one of the rising horror directors in recent years, takes it to new levels.
Now, regarding the burning question that many have probably thought about-how relevant is it to refresh your memory on the other films in the series before watching this one? It is, of course, recommended to watch them all, but if you need to prioritize, it's important to know that there's much more significance in rewatching the prequel films ("Prometheus" and "Alien: Covenant"), which the film references and builds upon much more significantly than the original four films.
In terms of world-building, which is very prominent in the first two classic films and also in the prequels, this film continues to expand the cinematic universe of the series in a fascinating way. Despite thinking that we've seen it all already, it manages to give a new spin to existing elements that were established in the other films, in a way that leaves room for future films.
Cailee Spaeny carrying the film brilliantly as the lead role, and David Johnson continues the legacy of the brilliantly acted Androids throughout the series with a very impressive show of acting. Alvarez did an amazing job with the directing- and atmosphere is probably the best aspect of the film.
Benjamin Wallfisch which is a student of the greatest ever, Hans Zimmer, was responsible for the music in the film- with a masterful blend of a more traditional score that references the musical mortifs of the older films, combined with electronic sounds which creates a very effective score that serves as fitting to the hybrid Sci-Fi/Horror genre.
This brings me to the next point-watching this film in an IMAX theater is an amazing experience that you must not miss. High-budget horror films capable of exploiting the advantages of the IMAX format to enhance the film's impact on the viewer are rare, and this film manages to do so in an exceptional way. The thrilling sound that surrounds you from every direction and the stunning visuals are fully utilized on the giant screen-with top-notch effects, impressive set design that remains consistent with the rest of the series, and an atmosphere that evokes terror from the very first moment.
Romulus is a great addition to the Alien saga, that opens the pathway to new opportunities for the franchise while still remaining true to the essence of the original series and the amazing prequels. Very recommended, especially for fans of the genre(s) and the series.
Alien³ (1992)
Peculiar Sequel to the Classic Franchise
After two quite remarkable films, the "Alien" franchise returned with a third movie that fails to match the level of its predecessors but still offers enjoyable entertainment and delight for genre fans.
An important point that can't be ignored, and one that I didn't really connect with in the movie, is that it seems like right from the opening scene, even in the title sequence, the film rushes to more or less completely undo everything that happened in the previous movie. It feels as though they thought of the prison plot and forced the story to get there, thereby disregarding almost everything that happened in the previous film as if it wasn't really significant. It's understandable that as a kind of "horror" film, there's often a legitimate attempt to shock, but when it comes to a sequel to one of the most important and successful sci-fi movies of all time, dismissing what came before so blatantly is a bit puzzling. What makes this even worse is that the writer of the movie is the same person who wrote the story for the previous film, so there's no denying the movie's place in the series' canon (unlike, for example, "Resurrection," which, of course, whether we like it or not, is part of the canon, but we would really prefer it wasn't).
Despite this, it's hard to say that the writing in the movie isn't good, as it might actually be the most humorous film in the series, with a dark humor that over the years became very typical to this film's director. The plot is also quite original, to be honest, although it feels more like a spin-off than a main continuation of the series. Furthermore, it does manage to deepen the motif of the political-economic interest of "the Company" that tries at any cost to obtain a Xenomorph to learn how to exploit it "for the benefit of humanity" (meaning, for their benefit) that we saw in the 2nd film.
Sigourney Weaver is excellent as usual, and it was also very nice to see the legendary Charles Dance ("Game of Thrones," "The Crown") in his early years in another role that seems like it was written especially for his acting style. As for the other actors... many of them need improvement, and the rest gave decent performances.
An interesting point is that, to be honest, when I started the series, I was quite surprised to discover that the most iconic shot from it actually comes from this movie, which isn't "considered" one of the best. An interesting tidbit I read about this scene is that the studio initially opposed including it in the movie, and it was a young and unknown director named David Fincher who insisted on including it (almost behind the producers' backs). The rest, of course, is history.
While the second movie continued the world-building that the first film started in an exemplary manner, here it seems like they took a step back and made a more limited film that doesn't provide a lot of additions to what we already received in the previous movies in terms of lore. While this isn't inherently a bad thing, it feels a bit like a side story where it's odd to place the central character like this. It's a bit late to think about it now, but in hindsight, perhaps it would have been possible to take Ripley's character in more meaningful directions in the direct continuation of the second film-of course, not in the bizarre retcon that the fourth movie made.
Xenomorph action is always fun, and in this movie, they took it in a completely new direction, so we would also recommend this film to fans of the genre. Although it's not a groundbreaking film like the previous two, it's still an enjoyable viewing experience and a nice movie in its own right. Additionally, it marks the debut of someone who would go on to become one of the best and most important directors in the history of cinema-so you could say it's a kind of must-watch film.
House of the Dragon: The Queen Who Ever Was (2024)
Solid Over-Hated Finale
The second season of "House of the Dragon" concluded with an amazing and one of the strongest episodes in the series, tying up loose ends and leaving us wanting more for the next season- despite not completely feeling like a season finale.
The episode opens with a humorous scene focusing on Tyland Lannister, whose presence (or any Lannister's, really) is always welcome on screen. A new character named Lohar is introduced, whose dynamic with Tyland amused us greatly, and we hope to see more of this charming friendship.
The scenes with the new dragon riders in Dragonstone were also amusing, with Hugh and Adam proving themselves worthy of the task, while Olaf starts to appear as a problem. While his confrontation with Jace was more than justified, Jace's character is starting to annoy with a frustrated teenager attitude.
Surprisingly, one of the strongest moments in the episode was the conversation between Criston Cole and Gavin Hightower in the forest. The dialogue was well-written, raising very interesting points regarding the perspective of people who truly participate in the war for those noble lords-cannon fodder for celestial creatures dictating the balance of power in the kingdom. "You saw what I saw. Dragons dance, and men are like dust beneath their feet. All our beautiful thoughts, all our efforts are for naught. We now march towards our annihilation. To die would be a kind of relief. Don't you think?" [*passes the joint*]
So, let's talk about the elephant in the room-the vision scene of Daemon towards the end of the episode. While I enjoyed references and connections to the original "Game of Thrones" series, especially the "Song of Ice and Fire" prophecy, it seems they overdid it a bit here. It was, of course, somewhat exciting to see the dragons return to the world again, but it seems the writers relied too much on nostalgia for the original series to provide excitement. The scene was essentially a summary of future events and key points in the upcoming story of House Targaryen-the death and disappearance of dragons from the world, their return through Daenerys, and their role in the war against the army of the dead-and the importance of uniting the kingdoms and using the dragons' power during the battle for humanity.
As usual, people on the internet are already using the scene to fuel their confirmation bias, claiming the series "proves" that Daenerys is the "prince that was promised" from the prophecy, whereas, in our opinion, this doesn't quite fit with what the prophecy says at all (for instance, Jon Snow fits the profile described much better following the events he was involved in in the original series). While they tried to do a nice, harmless fan service with a reference to the parent series, which I did find delightful, it seems this scene is just going to create arguments and tiring, unnecessary discussions among fans, who traditionally interpret it in a way that aligns best with their headcanon. Good luck to us.
I also had some issues related to consistency with this scene-for instance, why did the Night King or the White Walker appearing there look like an Temu version of a White Walker from "Game of Thrones"? And why give the Three-Eyed Raven the birthmark on his face as described in the books if in "Game of Thrones" he didn't have it? It just breaks continuity and is irritating to the eye. Still, as a sequence on its own, it was pretty cool-and it will be even more enjoyable to watch once the series is over and the foreshadowing becomes clearer in hindsight.
Another rather disappointing aspect of the vision scene is that, combined with what we saw in previous episodes in Daemon's arc (the realization that perhaps he does not really want or need to rule) that if now the power and motivation driving him, similar to Rhaenyra, is "saving the world," it somewhat diminishes the elements that make "Game of Thrones" what it is-as if we now have a group of "good guys" trying to put the right dynasty on the throne to save humanity, while there's the "bad" group trying to sabotage it out of selfish and petty interests-which feels like too conventional storytelling for what these series are trying to establish. Of course, we can't jump to conclusions right now, and we'll have to wait for the next seasons to really see how it progresses-they might still take it to interesting places.
And speaking of a group of "good guys" and a group of "bad guys," we've always argued in our reviews that Alicent has some sense in this whole situation and that she understands she's entered an unnecessary war-and in this episode, the writers made a very bold change from the book and actually added Alicent to the "good" group by having her more or less admit to Rhaenyra that the war is unnecessary and even agreed to put her on the throne, at the expense of her own children. Again, this division into a group of "good" and "bad" is somewhat problematic in our opinion, but it seems that already at this point the internet is abuzz about this decision by the writers, which many believe "ruined" the character of Alicent. Did it "ruin" her character? Not at all. It just changed it from the motivation she had in the book-which is entirely fine by me. It's important to remember that this is not the same story one-to-one as the books-after all, it is the same universe where "Game of Thrones" takes place, which already has significant changes from Martin's books. It's understandable why this decision by the writers might raise an eyebrow among many viewers, but without seeing how it develops in the following seasons, which have probably already been mapped out by the writers, it cannot be properly judged. In me opinion, it's actually a refreshing change that adds depth, conflict and new complexity to Alicent's character. But, as usual, the internet has already decided to sentence the series and decide that it's "bad," for many people even before they watched the episode (flashback to the days of leaks of episodes 4-6 in the final season of "Game of Thrones"). However, it is indeed a bit puzzling how she is willing to throw her children under the bus, but we'll have to wait and see what happens with it, because as mentioned, this is something that wasn't in the books and no one knows how it will progress. In any case, we wish the writers a lot of success, because the fandom of the "Game of Thrones" franchise on social networks has proven itself to be one of the most toxic since 2019, and after this episode, it seems the situation from now on will not be so different for "House of the Dragon" either.
Season 1 ended with both camps preparing for war-and season 2, unfortunately, ended also with both camps still preparing for war. In between, we received many quite magnificent scenes, and of course, significant developments of the characters themselves and the camps politically and strategically-and I personally enjoyed every moment. This specific episode was quite good, reminiscent in its style of the final episodes of "Game of Thrones," as it was an episode of drama and closure (and preparation for the next season's plot), without too much action or anything like that-but still satisfying as quality television. The ending scene shows the physical preparations for the war that will likely arrive at the very beginning of the next season, with an amazing montage that should guarantee composer Ramin Djawadi, who nailed it with his best work since the final episode of "Game of Thrones," his third Emmy. And the first Grammy. Wow.
I loved the material we received this year from the "Game of Thrones" franchise, and it's promised that in the upcoming seasons, we are set to see even more magnificent things, and that the war will reach quite shocking boiling points. Unfortunately, we'll probably have to wait about two years until the next season comes out-but in the meantime, no one stops us from watching "Game of Thrones" and the two existing seasons of "House of the Dragon" again and again to fill the void.
Let's return to the standard of 10 episodes per season, please. And we'll meet again (probably) in 2026.
House of the Dragon: The Red Sowing (2024)
And All the Dragons Roared as One
After a few rather dragging (but good) episodes, "House of the Dragon" returned with an episode that restores its former glory. This is the penultimate episode of the season, and beyond being excellent, it seems that after watching it, many of the choices made by the writers earlier in the season seem much more logical.
Now it's official-Daemon spends the entire season in Harrenhal! This can be understood to some extent, as according to the source material at this stage of "Dance of the Dragons," he wasn't doing much, but I still hoped they would give him a more significant storyline, considering how dominant he was in the previous season and how he's supposed to be dominant moving forward. In this episode, he continues a bit with the visions (again with a guest appearance by the great Paddy Considine), but beyond that, he finally secures for himself, and for Rhaenyra's camp, an army in a very strong scene where a young Lord Tully puts the murderous Targaryen ruler in his place. Welcome back, Sansa Stark! There's still one episode left in which Daemon can do something a bit more interesting, but unfortunately, it seems his arc this season amounts to visions and finally getting an army. Without a doubt, the great Matt Smith was a bit under-utilized this season, but one cannot discount the narrative importance of the vision, which teach us a lot about his character and personality, and about the understanding he gained regarding the forces that drove him throughout his life and the wrongs he caused to those close to him.
Of course, the main and most important part of this episode was the "Red Sowing" scene, the claiming of the dragons, during which two smallfolk secured new dragons for themselves-the second largest in Westeros, aside from Vhagar, at least among the dragons participating in the battle now. It's a spectacularly well-made scene presenting a new kind of dragon-action that we haven't seen in "House of the Dragon" or "Game of Thrones," and it did so satisfyingly, undoubtedly meeting the expectations and demands of fans who were thirsty for some action after a few episodes packed with drama alone. While the claiming scene of Hugh with Vermithor was dramatic, tragic, and epic, Ulf's similar scene with Silverwing was completely comedic, and we really liked the change of tone between the two scenes.
The whole "Red Sowing" affair presented in a new context the significant screen time the series invested in the smallfolk in previous episodes of the season, which, beyond providing a different perspective on the war, also laid the groundwork for the participation of ordinary citizens in a very significant part of the war and for them being an integral part of the balance of power. As always, it's interesting to see where this will develop in the future, but beyond that, it feels that in a repeat viewing of the season, those scenes that include them in previous episodes will be more interesting and seem more logical and important in retrospect.
Another main player in this episode is the brilliant composer Ramin Djawadi, who did perhaps the most successful work he has done this season so far, with several musical pieces that make us eagerly await the release of the season two soundtrack album, probably next Sunday, alongside the airing of the final episode. In general, the episode did an excellent job in all technical aspects, the most prominent of which is probably the visual effects, for obvious reasons. The design of the new dragons was excellent and managed to maintain originality and innovation, and it can even be said that, in general, there was an improvement in this aspect in the series this season compared to the first season.
The final scene of the episode was magnificent, with one of the most powerful shots seen since Daenerys' flamboyant displays of power in "Game of Thrones." Finally, it seems that the tables have turned and that there is competition for Vhagar, the largest dragon in Westeros, with three new dragons added to Rhaenyra's camp and ready to challenge it.
Traditionally, it seems that the next episode will be some kind of Aftermath episode, setting the stage for the great wars to come in future seasons, rather than an episode with additional Action Set Pieces-and hopefully, it will do so as satisfactorily as the ending episodes of this type were in the original "Game of Thrones."
House of the Dragon: The Red Dragon and the Gold (2024)
And So it Begins.
The Dance of Dragons ensues with one of the biggest spectacles we've seen in Television since 2019 when Game of Thrones ended.
Director Alan Taylor that helmed key GoT episodes such as 'Baelor', 'Fire and Blood' and 'Beyond the Wall' returns for some fiery Dragon action, with the best Dragon-on-Dragon action we've yet to see in the 'Game of Thrones' universe. While in my opinion still not in the level as the key battle sequences in GoT, the final sequence of the episode reminded me of the glory days when GoT was airing. The stakes were high, the action was amazingly made and accompanied by a great musical score by mastermind Ramin Djawadi.
Of course, the battle didn't take the entire screen time of the episode, and the rest of it was pretty good as well. The scenes at Harrenhal, for example, were one of the strengths of the episode. Unusually, in this aspect, "House of the Dragon" marked an improvement over the original series, as it seems they managed to portray the atmosphere and aura surrounding the "cursed" castle more effectively than in "Game of Thrones." The set design was stunning, the cinematography was excellent, and overall, the scenes succeeded in creating an atmosphere that aligns very well with how the castle is described in the original books and the common culture of the characters within the series' universe. The atmosphere was almost David Lynchian in its essence, feeling like a horror thriller for a moment, as if something is about to happen that we do not yet know, and more and more details unfold.
The buildup for the battle was also exceptionally made, and despite knowing it was coming (from the source material but also from reactions from critics), you can feel the tension naturally building towards the unknown slowly but steadily. The episode did wonders in character development as well; Aegon became more intriguing, Criston continues to be more and more insufferable (in a good way for a villain), and Aemond is starting to solidify himself, along with his seemingly unstoppable weapon of mass destruction, as one of my favorite antagonists in the GoT universe.
If I may get picky for a moment, one thing that was missing for me in the battle sequence was attachment to characters involved. Without delving into specifics (spoilers), the battle indeed had a few characters that served as 'hooks' for interest of the viewer, and I indeed felt attachment to them, but it seems that compared to GoT, where the writers always said they tried to build most of the battle sequences around the experience of key characters and their perspective, it felt like here it had a lesser effect to a degree. But to balance this complaint, I would like to mention the Dragon v. Dragon fighting was absolutely epic, and even better than the amazing sequence we had in the 'Long Night' episode in GoT. The sequence also managed to very effectively depict the horrors of war involving Weapons of Mass Destruction in their Westerosi version. Being the first dragon battle in this war, it showed that from here on, everything is only going to get much worse for everyone involved.
But in the bottom line, Kudos for Ryan Condal for sticking the landing in HOTD's first major action piece. Accompanied by many people of great talent such as the director, composer, VFX crew, Production Design crew, pyrotechnic crew etc., it seems at least for now that the major key pieces of the Dance of Dragons are in good hands. The episode is one of the best episodes in the series yet, and a worthy entry in the Game of Thrones cinematic universe. I'm sure the internet is going to discuss it in length in the days to come, just like in the good old days, and I can't wait for next Sunday to see how things unfold next.
House of the Dragon: Rhaenyra the Cruel (2024)
House of the Dragon Season 2 Continues Stronger than Ever with "Rhaenyra the Cruel"
The second season of "House of the Dragon" continues with full force, delivering an excellent second episode that even manages to be more consistent and captivating than its predecessor.
The episode opens with the aftermath of the despicable act committed at the end of the previous episode, under Rhaenyra's camp. With a new and wonderful musical composition by Ramin Djawadi, the shock that hit the Hightower camp and their response to the new situation they find themselves in is conveyed very effectively. While most of the characters grieve in their own ways, Otto Hightower immediately thinks about how he can leverage the situation for his political needs and to further his camp's agenda.
One of the strongest points of the episode is the performance of much of the main cast. Emma D'Arcy (Rhaenyra) and Tom Glynn-Carney (Aegon) established themselves as key players in the season already in the previous episode, but in this episode, it's Rhys Ifans (Otto Hightower) and Phia Saban (Helaena Targaryen) who deliver even stronger performances than usual. Otto's confrontation with Aegon was a powerhouse of quality acting from both sides, and Jaehaerys' funeral scene was just as uncomfortable as it was supposed to be, thanks to the exquisite performances of Phia and Olivia Cooke. Fabian Frankel (Criston Cole) also gave a rather impressive performance, managing to make his character more and more detestable to the viewer with each episode.
While the series receives a lot of criticism for portraying many actions that were very deliberate and premeditated in the book as "mistakes" in the series (whether it's the murder of baby Jaehaerys in the previous episode or Luke's murder at the end of the previous season), I sometimes view this as an improvement on the way things unfold in the source material. In the first season, the show's writers presented a clear bias towards Rhaenyra's camp, while already in the first two episodes of this season, it seems they are making an effort to balance the perspective presented in the series, by depicting both sides as having people who commit monstrous acts but also have others who strive for solutions that would prevent unnecessary bloodshed. Of course, above all, each camp has its own personal interests and hunger for power driving it for various reasons, but on both sides, there are characters who are internally conflicted by the situation and the bloody war that is undoubtedly approaching, which is the result of quite a few wrong decisions made by certain decision-makers on both sides, while other decision-makers try to balance the situation in a more calculated manner.
For those who don't know, the book "Fire & Blood" on which the series is based was not written as an objective source book (unlike the original "A Song of Ice and Fire" series), but as a sort of biased "history book" presenting conflicting and sometimes contradictory viewpoints from "historians" trying to document the "Dance of the Dragons" years after it occurred. While this is a wonderful concept for a book, it would work less well in a series, and these changes that the writers are making to the plot, in my opinion, cleverly bridge this gap, creating a story that is indeed told as an objective story while maintaining a certain balance and narrative coherence.
The episode prominently highlights the difference of this series from its parent series, at least at this stage, as the scenes are divided between the two camps and occur mainly in two different settings, unlike "Game of Thrones" where each episode was scattered in a million different places and comprised many short segments about different characters. This has its advantages and disadvantages, but briefly, it can be said that while it doesn't feel as rich in plot as "Game of Thrones" as of yet, the plot in "House of the Dragon" is more focused and there is more momentum in the transition between scenes (a bit like in the later seasons of the parent series).
Needless to say, the technical aspects are absolutely top notch just as we've learned to expect. The Music, Cinematography, Visual Effects, Costume Design, Production Design, etc. Are still the best there are on TV these days. The writing by Hess was extremely great as well.
So far, the second season of "House of the Dragon" is excellent in my opinion, and I am enjoying every moment. The political intrigues and schemes are intensifying by the moment, heading towards a boiling point that will undoubtedly arrive soon.
Cat's Luck (2024)
One of the Best Israeli Comedies in Recent Memory
We've loved the works of Guy Amir and Hanan Savyon for years. We admit we haven't seen every single one, but we've been following them since the days of the groundbreaking "Asfur," and we've watched them grow bigger and bigger, which has been a delight. They also do a lot to honor Jerusalem in their films, in the language style of their scripts, and in their personal connection to it.
Let's start with the script-it's crazy and hilarious. We haven't laughed this much at a film in a long time. The plot is so random and coincidental, the whole movie is wildly imaginative, with a lot of attention to small details and nuances that often steal most of the laughs. The film is very self-aware, especially with all the inside jokes about police series and investigations and the supposed "clichés" that are actually clichés of police movies. Tzachi Halevi's character, for example, as a "stereotypical" detective, had us crying with laughter. All the nuances were there, and the scenes with him were always great.
The film's plot is very "incidental" in that there's no simple linear story in a traditional structure-one of the film's strengths, in our opinion. While there's an overarching plot, the film transitions from one situation to another, composed of long "acts" in different events-something between theater and the random evolution of absurd situations in the style of Larry David ("Seinfeld," "Curb Your Enthusiasm"). There's always room in the film industry for unconventional storytelling, and we think this film does an excellent job of bringing a less traditional style to Israeli comedies.
In our opinion, Guy Amir and Hanan Savyon are the most talented filmmakers in the country for several years now, impressing in every possible aspect. As writers, directors, and lead actors in the film, they literally carry the movie entirely on their own, alongside the impressive cast and the incredibly talented crew working behind the scenes. The writing is sharp, as we've come to expect from them, the direction is excellent and very ambitious, and the acting-anyone who has seen one or two things they've starred in already knows how funny they are.
Besides the killer performances by Amir and Savyon, with their insane and long-standing chemistry that is already rare to find, the cast is full of great actors who keep appearing. Mali Levi is fantastic, Yossi Marshak is hilarious, Lior Ashkenazi, Yaniv Swisa, Rotem Abuhav, and many more.
Maybe it's a matter of personal taste or sense of humor, but we haven't seen a film (Israeli or international) that was this funny from start to finish in a long time. Whether you're a fan of Hanan and Savyon's style or not, we highly recommend watching the film and giving it a try. The movie had a big start on Israeli Cinema Day a few weeks ago, and we hope this indicates its astronomical success while it's showing in theaters across the country and the world. "Maktub" was groundbreaking in this respect, and we hope this film achieves equally good-if not even higher-success.
We genuinely believe this film has great potential to succeed in other parts of the world as well; its humor is very global and not specifically "Israeli humor." We think wide audiences can really enjoy it. It's no coincidence that the CEO of Netflix saw the immense comedic potential of this duo.
Let's talk less technically-as Christopher Nolan always says, while cinema is one of the highest and most complex art forms, people ultimately go to the movies to enjoy themselves. You can spin it in many directions, but when people go to the movies, they want a good time. And that's exactly what this film provides. You go to the cinema, enjoy for almost two hours, and leave the theater with a smile on your face. If that's the case, the film probably succeeded in what it aimed to achieve.
In our opinion, it's one of the funniest comedies we've seen recently, in general. In a world where comedies can already be tiresome and repetitive, it's so refreshing to see an Israeli comedy that brings so much innovation while also riding on clichés along the way, telling a light and beautiful story, and above all, making you laugh a lot.
Don't miss it!
By Dvir971 & Orr971.
House of the Dragon: A Son for a Son (2024)
A Triumphant Return to Form
"House of the Dragon" has returned to our screens with a roar, throwing the viewer back into the world of Westeros without sparing any of the elements we have come to expect from a series set in the cinematic universe of "Game of Thrones."
The opening scene will evoke a chilling sense of nostalgia for any fan of the original series, as we see Winterfell and the Wall for the first time in five years, accompanied by the unique winter aesthetics of "Game of Thrones" and the iconic music that characterizes the North. House Stark returns with fitting dialogue and accents, and I certainly hope they will appear frequently as the season and series progress.
Already a few minutes later, the episode delves right into intrigue, politics, schemes, and closed-room conversations befitting a series set in the complex world George R. R. Martin has built over several decades. The classic "Game of Thrones" paradox returns in full force: the same people who complained that the later seasons of the original series were "too fast" and lacked the dialogues and quiet scenes of the early seasons are now complaining that this series is "too slow"-but personally, I think "Game of Thrones" has always been like this: building drama slowly and meticulously until the climactic and action-packed moments that always feel rewarding and cathartic after all the buildup.
It's been two years since the end of the first season of "House of the Dragon" and five years since the end of the original series, during which countless shows have tried to be the fantasy sensation that would replace "Game of Thrones." But already in the first 20 minutes of the episode, it's clear there's only one true contender for the throne, in almost every possible aspect: the music, the production values, the sets, the costumes, the effects, the cinematography, and more. In fact, regarding costumes, wigs, and set design, there's a significant improvement over the first season.
Alan Taylor, one of HBO's legendary directors, who besides classics like "The Sopranos," "Boardwalk Empire," and "Oz" also directed several key episodes of the original "Game of Thrones" series-including the iconic Episode 9 of Season 1 that changed television forever with Ned Stark's execution-directed this episode. Taylor is expected to direct several episodes this season, and while it's a bit sad that we lost (at least for now) Sapochnik and Yaitanes, who directed almost half of the previous season, it seems the series is still in good hands.
In terms of acting, Emma D'Arcy (Queen Rhaenyra) and Tom Glynn-Carney (King Aegon) stand out, displaying a complex and nuanced understanding of their characters. Additionally, Olivia Cooke (Alicent Hightower) delivers an especially impressive performance, capturing the divided nature of her character's internal conflict.
The final scene was a key event from the books that many readers have been anticipating since the beginning of the series. If we thought the shocking event from the end of the first season was the official declaration of war, now both sides have no way back. As usual with "Game of Thrones," the internet is buzzing with complaints from readers disappointed that the scene didn't play out word-to-word as in the books, but personally, I thought it was excellent, effective, and particularly shocking. Such a scene at the end of the first episode reminds us that the series will not hold back and won't hesitate to throw shocking events our way-and I can promise you this is truly just the beginning.
Inception (2010)
A Modern Sci-Fi Masterpiece by Christopher Nolan
It's a bit strange to think that almost 15 years have passed Since Oscar Winner Christopher Nolan's film "Inception" premiered, but I don't think it's too early to say that the film has established itself as one of the most beloved and true classics of the sci-fi genre.
Nolan always used to say that the main thing he aims to achieve in his films is an enjoyable and unforgettable viewing experience. On the surface, the film sounds very complex and intricate, and it may require some internet research and at least 2-3 viewings to fully understand it, but that doesn't prevent it from being enjoyable and fascinating to watch - with some breathtaking and unforgettable action scenes seen on the big screen, a cast packed with amazing actors, and a lot of depth and emotional investment from the viewer in the story, plot, and characters.
As someone who has seen the film a respectable number of times, I can attest that this effect of the film is never diminished, and it manages to captivate the viewer with each repeated viewing, being enjoyable as if it were the first time. Furthermore, every time you watch the film, no matter how many times you've seen it before, you discover new things and understand the plot more, which makes the viewing experience more and more enjoyable each time. The more you watch it and pay attention to the small details, the more you realize the amount of thought and sophistication invested in it, and you understand that Nolan has succeeded in writing a masterpiece here. It's also amazing how seeing this film at different ages and stages in life gives it a completely new perspective, and at no stage do you feel that the film belittles the intelligence of the viewer with populist tricks, but quite the opposite.
It's often easy to underestimate the depth of Sci-Fi/Action films of this kind, and rightfully so. But if there's one thing Nolan taught us throughout his career, it's that original and intelligent Genre films can also cater to a broad audience while offering plenty of depth, literary devices, and touches of philosophical themes - and that's precisely what makes this film so special and extraordinary. Nolan creates a sub-world within the subconscious, with its own logic and rules, and manages to immerse the viewer into it as if it were real science that simply needs to be learned - and he does it amazingly and incredibly simple. With this technique, he gives the viewer a rare ability to explore the identities and secrets of the characters, and he does it in a way that manages to be particularly enjoyable, sometimes blurring the levels of depth the film manages to reach. If not for Nolan's commitment to the cinema medium, the concept of the film could have been expanded and explored in a broader way for a multi-season television series, expanding the idea mentioned here of exploring the hidden personalities of characters in many different variations.
Another groundbreaking aspect of this film is the exceptional soundtrack by the German composer Hans Zimmer. This is, in my opinion, the best film score of all times, and objectively, it's an iconic soundtrack that redefined how action films were scored in the years that followed- and also trailers! Beyond its iconic and highly acclaimed status, it's a remarkable composition that blends orchestral music with electronic elements in precise amounts, elevating every moment of the film several notches - the action becomes much more intense and relentless, and the emotional moments become even more tear-jerking. Even the exposition moments, which the film doesn't skimp on and is infamous for, are accompanied by amazing music that draws the viewer in and captivates them as they learn the "rules of the game".
In general, on the technical side, the film lives up to its name as a work of perfectionism, with stunning cinematography, awe-inspiring editing, and visual effects that still, and will not seem outdated anytime soon. Since the film is made in a flawless manner in every possible aspect, the American film academy is still infamously remembered today for its behavior towards it at the 2011 Oscars- Particularly, the fact that Nolan wasn't even nominated in the Best Director category for this film. Fortunately, history has corrected this by recognizing the film as one of the most important films of the 2000s, and as a milestone for the Science-Fiction genre, not to mention a modern classic in general.
"Inception" remains one of the most brilliant films to grace the big screen, and if by chance someone still hasn't seen it, I highly recommend it. Beyond being a brilliant film that provides pure enjoyment throughout its duration and is made to perfection, it's also a deeply profound film with a story that is no less dominant than its action and direction, dealing with themes like loss, escapism, and longing. It's very evident that Nolan poured his heart and soul into making this film, and the end result is a movie that will continue to captivate film lovers for many years to come - all while offering a more accessible approach to deeper and complex themes and an extraordinary story for a wide audience.
A Modern masterpiece, and an easy 10/10.
3 Body Problem (2024)
Sensational
After successfully adapting the "Song of Ice and Fire" book series, which was long considered unfilmable literature, into one of the most iconic and successful television series of all time ("Game of Thrones"), David Benioff and D. B. Weiss sought their next challenge. At the perfect timing, the challenge presented itself in the form of an offer to adapt the "Remembrance of Earth's Past" book trilogy into a television series.
Already in the early episodes you can tell this is one of the most ambitious Science-Fiction stories yet to be produced on television, and I can definitely see what all the early hype was about. The source material for itself is said to be fascinating but simultaneously very challenging to adapt to the visual medium, with some elements (also in the first book/season but mostly in the latter ones) that are hyped to be almost impossible to put to screen. Netflix put a huge amount of money on this franchise during a bidding war years ago, and once Benioff & Weiss signed their overall deal with them it was a perfect opportunity to try and build a household-name Sci-Fi franchise for Netflix with this show- and I surely hope it will ultimately receive the success it deserves.
Following the commercial success of "Game of Thrones" and its numerous awards and unprecedented viewership numbers, Benioff & Weiss became the hottest names in the television industry by the end of 2019, and all major production companies competed on having them produce their next series among their studios, with astronomical budgets. Expectations for the duo were higher than usual - to deliver a product on par with "Game of Thrones" and also to redeem their reputation after mixed reviews of its conclusion, which were accompanied by harsh criticisms and disproportionate "wishes" from a vocal minority of the audience.
For this purpose, they teamed up with Alexander Woo ("True Blood"), and together they decided to adapt the trilogy by Cixin Liu into a series - a daring trilogy that received numerous awards and accolades, including from George R. R. Martin (the author behind "Game of Thrones") and former US President Barack Obama.
Similarly to "Game of Thrones", the story told in the trilogy is undoubtedly a slow-burner, gradually unfolding over time and requiring patience and investment from the viewer over several episodes to fully appreciate. Already in the first season, the storyline appears to shift multiple times throughout the season, as the overarching narrative the series is aimed at becomes clearer from episode to episode. The season finale was labeled by some viewers as "anti-climactic," but most readers of the books agree that the first book is the weakest of the trilogy and merely sets the stage for ambitious developments in future seasons, with the manner of visual execution of which remains a mystery. Nevertheless, it is important to note that even as a self-contained season, this is television at a very high level, offering one of the most unique and enjoyable viewing experiences in recent years. The series never bores, and it even provides some of the greatest television moments of recent years.
For understandable reasons, the most talked-about episode from the first season is the fifth episode, while my personal favorite is actually the seventh episode, which focuses on character dynamics, positioning pieces for the big conflict, and strengthening its narrative through writing.
The series contains a plethora of concepts from the worlds of theoretical physics and Science-Fiction that may not be easily digestible and may potentially alienate those less inclined towards the genre - something that, in my opinion, might benefit the series if viewers watch it at a suitable pace rather than binge-watching everything at once. Considering that the series is not as universally popular to a degree that spoilers flying around the internet, and since everyone can essentially watch it at their own pace, I would highly recommend the series even to people for whom Sci-Fi isn't their number one genre- as it requires investment but also offers much more than regular Sci-Fi entertainment, presenting a non-conventional spin on the genre. As a man of science myself and as a fan of the Sci-Fi genre I'm really connecting to the premise of the show, to the setting, to the characters and to the respect the writing has to the scientific concepts the show is based upon. This show truly ignites my intellectual and academic passions in all the positive ways. The plot and the writing are blending into this complex setting perfectly in a way that got me completely hooked and wanting for more.
The production values are extremely off the charts and I really hope this will be a major player in Below-the-Line categories at the Emmy's next year. I would even root for it in several Above-the-Line categories at the awards, since as I implied this series is crafted to perfection in almost all aspects. I was thrilled to find out Benioff and Weiss re-teamed with the legendary composer Ramin Djawadi in this series. Known for iconic scores such as "Game of Thrones", "Westworld" and "House of the Dragon", Djawadi provides a magnificent score that truly elevated the series to another level just as you would expect. Besides practically telling an entire story within the show, the score is a delight to listen to outside of watching the show, combining several different musical styles. Knowing how Djawadi operates it's safe to believe the score is building up to be gradually better and better and more complex as the show moves further towards the climax. While the visual effects could use some improvement, the other technical aspects are also of a very high standard and justify the enormous budget invested in the series. The writing, as expected, is top-notch and treats the source material with great respect and maturity, while the direction is also excellent and perfectly meets the demands set by the script. The story and overall framing and world-building are overwhelmingly ambitious and are executed in a brilliant way that makes it one of the most unique and thrilling television experiences iv'e had in a long time.
I'm glad to have a new TV series to be heavily invested in, and will surely look forward anxiously for the future seasons, that as described by the writers (and also by readers of the book trilogy) will be even better and more ambitious. I really enjoyed every single episode and while I think its a must watch for fans of the genre, I also think the story and execution are good enough so that even people who are not huge followers of the Sci-Fi genre should give it a try. Kind of like with GoT back in the day.
Kudos to Netflix for this brilliant series which is one of the best things I've seen in a long time. Bring on season 2!
Six Feet Under: All Alone (2005)
Probably the Most Depressing Thing I've Ever Seen
I don't know how to describe this episode in words. Ever since the first time I watched it, it never left me.
I don't think I've ever wept as much during an hour's run of an episode/film as much as I did in that one.
This episode is one of the greatest things I've watched in my life, but it's still hard for me to come and revisit it. I've never seen such depiction of grief, that builds on 4.5 seasons-long of connections to the characters we've come to know so well.
The acting, directing, writing- everything about it is perfect. It is an episode that is very hard to digest but a truly exceptional piece of cinema. Only after making a masterpiece of a show such as 'Six Feet Under' during such a long time you can create such a connection to characters that will resonate in an episode such as this one.
Masterpiece. I have no other words.